Oh, do you perhaps mean Theodore Payne Foundation at https://theodorepayne.org/ ? I was just searching Thomas Payne Foundation and that was what came up
IG was cool when it started, but yeah, its acquisition (and shortly before) was such a swift downhill slide. Haven't even logged into my account in years and years.
People have this real tendency to say x never would have accomplished y, when in fact the ecosystem was ripe for it
The Winklevoss twins, whose project Zuckerberg intentionally delayed while he got to market first (whatever it was. I don't know exactly. Some say it was only a dating site. Some say they used bootstrapping effects to onboard colleges first). It was 2003 or whatever. It very well could've disrupted Myspace or Friendster and made them multi billionaires
"Instagram had no users" people really liked Instagram. It could've taken off, if it wasn't already
Whatsapp - Whatsapp was profitable. Now Zuck has access to your phone numbers
Stop a) whitewashing his history and b) stop assuming "blah never would have accomplished". That's an utterly bizarre take in the face of theft
Been using Flickr since 2005, and been paying for Pro since 2015 (it cost $24.95 then). It's still the best photo-sharing community, by far.
Pretty disappointed my Pro subscription somehow increased by 60% this year. That's pretty uncool. I guess all the crippling of free accounts still hasn't reduced costs enough, or something. It's bad enough you can never see original size on free accounts anymore (even though I'm now paying $135/year!), apparently reduction in functionality that was theoretically supposed to keep costs down still hasn't prevented a continual escalation of Pro subscription cost (regardless of my minimal usage of the site).
Yeah the time capsule thing is a big part of its value to me. I will never forget how disappointed I was when the "Macintosh" group disappeared. I think at some point I actually chatted with someone who worked at Flickr and explained that the group owner simply closed it at some point (can't remember 100%). It had so many photos going back to basically the earliest days of Flickr, of all kinds of awesome photos of Mac computers of all eras, not only new digital photos but tons of stuff people posted from prior decades. The other Mac/Apple-related groups were not as comprehensive. That was good while it lasted, at least. I wish there was some way to re-open the group :\
As someone who has been online since 1992, I love the post. I miss the internet of the late 90's every day. We're no longer "one quick search" away from anything now, because web search has been completely poisoned by SEO slop. It was nice while it lasted though. As far as I can tell, all of the advancements we have were possible without completely ruining the web and the global commons we started to have a taste of.
> Collecting replies like pokemon seems like a real waste of time in my opinion
It's a hobby. "Let people enjoy things". Please remember this: it's a hobby. It's right there in the name: amateur radio. We're not trying to be world-class industry-leading RF engineers.
Neither are the nycmesh people, who seem to have a fair bit of hobby-grade fun in doing what they do in their spare time, but the end result of their hard work provides significantly greater real-world end to end communication systems for people to use... If the purpose of amateur radio is to communicate, DXing and such doesn't really accomplish much real world utility.
No, not everything in the world has to be utilitarian or accomplish a purpose. But amateur radio is continually living in the past, their entire communication paradigm is often based on something akin to circuit-switched networking when the packet based networking world passed them by quite some years ago.
Yeah, all that stuff depends where you are located. Up here in Vancouver amateur radio community, any kind of bigoted/discriminatory/exclusionary crap is totally not accepted or tolerated. There are always people experimenting with new things, sharing knowledge/experience, helping each other out. Heck, I built a portable radio pack and made a blog post about it, and my local club included my post (with my permission) in their monthly newsletter. I've also contributed photos to them and attended numerous community events -- always 100% welcoming and there's a strong educational/sharing vibe to all their events. When I hear people complaining about "hams" I'm always thankful to have seen almost none of this stuff locally.
LoRa can reach hundreds of km's, just depends on positioning. Current verified Meshtastic ground-to-ground distance record is 331km (205mi) which is pretty nuts. Between two mountain peaks, of course. :) https://meshtastic.org/docs/overview/range-tests/
Wow, the coverage is nuts. I should hop on, looks like I've got solid coverage in my area. Been too lazy to properly give it a try but obviously I really should! Thanks for the link!
Actually the opposite, tons of ppl in the meshtastic community (Discord) berate amateur radio operators. I stopped even discussing the subject because of how much derision I observed or was subjected to. Lots of insults and nasty jokes in passing as soon as the topic even comes up whatsoever. Kinda like your post, actually - offhanded derogatory remarks about an entire group of people solely because of the hobby they're involved in.
Eh, it's a stereotype. In my opinion, they should always be questioned, especially when it's an unkind one like this.
Frankly I'm surprised to see this here. Hackers have had more than their share of hurtful stereotype applied to both our hobby and our personality. We should know better. But perhaps there's a generational divide at work there.
Kinda, most hams are very rhadamanthine about following every tiny rule to the letter, or their even stricter interpretation of the spirit. The type of people who complain about young people not joining the hobby while insisting on maintaining strict licensing rules and tests. It's very much the polar opposite of hacker ethic.
The two biggest ham people I've known both, independently and separated by years, discussed enjoying war driving looking for "pirate" radio signals that they can report to the FCC. Amusing to find this is a cultural aspect of ham radio licensees.
I've got friends in the scene and their behavior about it reminds me of other types of friends I have
1. Amateur pilots
2. People late in their years getting into martials arts for the first time (will be the loudest "KIYA"s in the class and always doing the most aggressive deep bows lol)
3. Non libertarian gun nuts. Oh buddy the attention they pay to everything from how you load your gun at the range to how you've had it packed in your car.
I have specific individuals in mind for each of these categories and I say this without ill intent, I'm not trying to disparage this behavior, it just seems to be a specific kinda thing, where following the exact letter of written direction seems to be half the fun for them.
This in opposition to some other types I know who aren't having fun unless SOME rule is being broken...
This + amateur radio is designed to be open, no encryption, anyone can talk with anyone, and if you're "being stupid" (to not use other terms), anyone can tell you so.
The "secret, encrypted, private" chats correlate more with random "doomsday preppers", and younger non-hams (cheap, no need to get licenced). Many of those people buy (ham) radios too ("for emergencies", can't transmit legally anyway), but don't really contribute to anything. Emergencies are handled by trained groups of hams when/if they're called to help by whatever proper agency needs help with communications.
You can legally transmit for any emergency, regardless of licensing status. The emergency definition is purposefully left ambiguous so as to apply to many situations. Lost in the woods? Go ahead, transmit; the FCC isn't going to knock on your door if you live. Every HAM should know this already.
This is the correct info. Anyone in an emergency is allowed to use the amateur frequencies. Just got my technician license a couple weeks ago, emergency use is even actually on the test!
> No provision of these rules prevents the use by an amateur station of any means of radiocommunication at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communication systems are not available.
That rule applies only to amateur stations (it says so right in the text!), not unlicenced individuals. What an amateur station is is defined in the beggining of the document, and yes, that requires the a duly-authroized (licenced) operator.
The last thing you want in an emergency event is some prepper with a baofeng transmitting on a repeaters frequency without a subtone set (because he's too stupid to pass an exam that 10yo kids can pass) effectively jamming it for proper emergency users. The other thing is, that chances are no one will actually hear you, especially on simplex. With tools like garmin inreach, carrying an HT with you instead of something proper and relying on that to save you in a time of need is just stupid.
Ham radio is like driving, you need experience to do it, and even some experienced people still do it badly. Trying to figure out how to drive by reading a car manual while the flood waters are rising is going to be a pretty bad experience.
Well, according to multiple times where people have checked with FCC enforcement folks, the spirit of the ruling covers unlicensed users operating in amateur bands for real emergencies.
The rules are clear here, there is no "spirit" in the law. The problem is, that the myth of somehow being "saved" by having a baofeng with you is spreading and people will die because of that. Hopefully only the baofengers and not others, affected by people who would effectively jam multiple others operating on eg. a repeater.
Ham radios don't just appear, someone has to buy them, buying one without getting a proper licence is just stupid.... but many (especially americans) do so. There is GMRS, there is FRS, people could take those radios, try them out when not in an emergency, but nope... everyone wants that uv-5r for some reason.
Every one of those preppers should get licenced first, go to some hiking trail, some remote..ish pota park and try to do an unspotter POTA activation there... and after failing horribly, they'll rethink their emergency communications. Somehow even licenced hams (about which I assume none actually tried doing an unspotted pota from some hiking trail) support and spread the "just buy a baofeng for emergencies". In reality... they're useless in most cases. If you're somewhere remote, no one will hear you anyway, and if you're stuck at home, having something like a starlink will actually help you reach someone, much better than a radio, especially a handheld 2m/70cm one. You might get some good but useless DX with an HF one, but you won't be setting up an NVIS antenna in a snow storm.
the rules arent clear, which is why 97.403 and 97.405 have been argued nauseam for a VERY long time. It's intentionally vague so that some people cant claim being out of soap as an emergency. But during a real emergency (someone had a heart attack on the floor, you're being chased by an axe murderer, etc) every single representative has said that the spirit of those parts covers the person. I don't disagree that people should get licensed, mostly so they know how and where to operate the radios or god forbid we do have a collapse and do have to fix up our own radios and antennas.
It's not actually vague, if they wanted "everyone" to do that, they'd use "everyone","anyone" or some similar wording, not specifically limit the exception to amateur station. Someone chose that for a reason, and it's a good reason... even licenced hams can cause trouble (eg. forget to turn off a simplex repeater on a radio, "mars mod" it and then jam the fire department frequencies with it,... a few weeks ago), and people who can't pass the simple exam don't need such radios, they can get by with GMRS (if they're from US and able to fill out an online form) for FRS/PMR (if they're not) or even MURS (again in US). There is no real difference in range between an uv-5r and a uv-5g (ham and gmrs radios), and a very small difference with frs/pmr (you need a line of sight anyway).
If someone had a heart attack, somewhere remote enough, that there is no cell signal, using a GMRS radio will have the same effect and range than a ham radio (i'm talking about 5W HTs here). Using something like a garmin inreach would actually get them help, but still, preppers want their baofengs, and for some reason don't want the *g models. That's why i get bothered when people promote ham radios, especially baofengs for emergencies, because they'll be useless in most cases and people who don't know that, will rely on them instead of getting a proper tool for the job. Many of those even have that in their pockets right now (some samsungs and iphone can do satellite communications already). Promoting the "you don't need a licence in emergencies" and then turning to "you'll be breaking the law anyway but who cares" mentality means that people don't learn even the basics (if they did, they'd be able to pass the exam) but still rely on those radios to get help.. and in turn, people will die because of that.
As i said before.. if you have a heart attack in the middle of nowhere, a baofeng won't get you help. If you went with gmrs/frs, you'd test it out and see the limited range and that no one is actually listening out there (unless arranged, and that person is in simplex range), if you get licenced, then you'd do the same, call out cqs into the void until you got bored, but if you do the "just buy one, you don't need licences..." (even if you do need to be licenced), people will be using that radio for the first time during an active emergency and fail in getting help with them. Stop promoting the untrue myth of getting help with a ham radio, instead offer proper tools for the job and people will actually be able to get help.
You're arguing for why people shouldn't buy a ham for prepping without a license or weirdly arguing that someone who is totally unprepared should've just happened to have a garmin on them. Realistically most people aren't toally prepared. A wife went to a remote cabin with their husband who is a ham op and has a heart attack, someone falls off a cliff while taking a photo of someone with their phone and the only thing is a mobile vhf/uhf radio in their car, etc etc etc. there are countless reasons why someone unlicensed might end up needing to transmit on amateur bands in an emergency, which again is why it's vague. You're claiming its not even though FCC enforcers themselves have said otherwise, so you should probably go argue with the fcc instead of strangers on the internet.
reply